Must Obey Creationist View

Yes! Here we go. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it. because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. It ties in yes it does. One of the Ten Commandment "Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy".>>>God, also said to me, "to rest". Well, He rested.

Claims God created a world with a false history 'Appearance of age' is directly refuted by the Bible. The Bible says the heavens declare His glory. Does any biblical writer make the claim that God's word contradicts historical facts? Claiming God would lie with false history, as in far away stars is a direct attack on Gods nature! God would not deceive, Satan would! The stars light confirm what they confirm, some are threatened, others are not. Stars light years away can be seen, it can't be refuted.

simple ATP ADP process it is known rotating magnetic fields recondition (alter) DNA molecules structures, Once the DNA has been conditioned by rotating magnetic fields, the cells reproduce accordenly. This is basic newtonian randomness; thats the point, randomness. I suspect no matter the answer Mr Jerry will hide behind a wall of smugness and repeat the question, proffering an aura of credibility, to him.

UGeoff; "Unfortunately too much unsubstantiated theory is being passed off as good science; therefore it requires a higher degree of faith to believe evolution than the biblical creation account" Isa that a statement you (or anyone) can back up? ITS NOT AN ANSWER YOU HAVE GIVEN, ITS A STATEMENT.

MikeM, on 8/24, you said "[I] offered a rhetorical statement." In order for me to defend it, please quote the statement you took rhetorically. I didn't say or imply 'it is so because it is so.' However, authentic science and theology agree 100%. Unfortunately too much unsubstantiated theory is being passed off as good science; therefore it requires a higher degree of faith to believe evolution than the biblical creation account.

'bibliography' my point, educated kooks can be found to back up anything. I dont see the need to differientate between young earth 'scientist' and geocentrist 'scientist.' Both are fundamentalist, both have faith based presuppositions rendering objective reality irrelevant, that unifies them, rendering distinctions like 'geocentric universice' and 'ex nihilo' minor. Peas in a pod. I heard bloggers say again and again,"I don't care about evidence," rendering God given rationality meaningless.

Willow; Argumentative, I prefer the term debate. I thought that iswhat these blogs were all about, a free and open dialectic.As to your answer, it is known as a non-sequitor. My maxim is; 'If ones faith cannot stand the test of free inquiry, its finished.'-Thomas Jefferson. All is fair game.

Mike M many of the pastors of the church now are teaching the feel good messages "a touch of grace a dash of what makes you feel good" a sprinkle of jokes, and a samll pinch if the bible , rolled together in vageness and served to the the public. If all of us were to take a test of what is truth or could write an essay on what christianty is really about..I beleive most of us would get a C-..this is Alarming to me. that is one reason I love the Quizzes here,they teach us clearly.

Geoff, You have offered a rhetorical statement. As a thinking person I ask, can you back that statement up? Anyone can make a dogmatic statement, it becomes a tautological fallacy when one says, 'it is so because it is so.'

Mike, how does "real science" corroborate the bible, specifically? Science tends to begin with observation, so to state something like gravity being alluded to in the bible is to say nothing notable. But to get onto topics like the beginning of life (or the end), or cosmology, science & your faith differ tremendously. And what about the biblical prohibition of wearing fabrics of blended fibers?

MikeM, it seems it requires a greater amount of faith along with diminished intellect to embrace a majority of the theories which contradict the biblical worldview. I find that real science corroborates the Bible. Therefore the Bible is reliable and established.

after reading some of these posts I am made very awhere the most christians are 2 steps behind their pagan neighbors..this tells as ministers of Christ the pastors (myself included) have failed the Church. Romans 2:242For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.It is sad..

Mike: I find it strange, no more of a paradox, that you prefer reading one astrononmer's work, Hugh Ross, but not another one, Robert Newman trained at a better instituion than U Texas, Cornell, under a world-famous scholar, Carl Sagan.

You want to impress people quoting from your one book. Why not get another? It is only $8.00 at Amazon

3.Also we went to tent revivals. The clergy paid us students a few dollars to come to the alter and become emotional, cry and holler, all to 'prime the pump' so the locals would also come to the alter. After a few nights of this they did not need us, as the locals were coming to the alter.What they paid us to do worked; but the clergy still had to pay us so we would not heckle them from the back.

2.The security at the new age expo escorted us out when we heckled one of the performers exposing his fake levatation by tossing soda on the mirror that 'levatated' him. I admit the Creation musium staff were far more 'mature' than the new age staff,-or us, the new age folk threw us out, the Creation staff gave us hugs after we became 'pedantic.' As to our maturity, my rationalization is I was in college, 1991. Humbly, I admit they were very nice people.

1.ANON-Yes we went to a Creation museum just for fun, as we went to a new age 'expo' in Vegas' for fun. We also set about exposing some of the bizarre antics of the New Age folk, readings, past-life-regression etc. They put on a great show, the 'greatest show on earth.' I believe exposing falsehoods clears the path toward truth, somewhat.

Mike 1/2"As to smarts, I fiqure I'm low average. College degrees are a dime a dozen..."Now I am NOT trying to be elitist, but there are several here who have degrees, and advanced degrees here, and all learning comes from picking the brains of those with better knowledge.My observation is that you are reluctant to do that, preferring to lob rocks from afar, perhaps getting pleasure from those fleeing your rocks.

Mike 2/2I've been here longer than you, and see a pattern of your antisocial posts. Instead of building up, or helping,you prefer to tear down. Thats not healthy.Perhaps you are driven by anger. I was. I tried some of the same tactics as you, wondering why people did not like me. A college professor suggested that I see a counselor, and it was the begininning of a great, but hard journey towards wholeness,I suggest you do also, not because I am better, but because I care about you.

2.All these non-sequiters and ad hominum attackes are deflections from the issues, thus the truth. The only protestant that has 'creationist' ideas of merit I have seen is a Hugh Rosss, who doesn't deny reality to maintain faith. I will'look into' that book.I don't retreat into personal attacks, but have tried to stick with the issues.

1.John T-I am no elite, my only liberal hero is Clarence Darrow. He was raised in a poor family. Went to law school, became Americas most famous lawyer.Darrrow did not forget where his beginning; he defended the working class man. As to smarts, I fiqure I'm low average. College degrees are a dime a dozen in social sciences, and a quarter in the hard scinces.

1.John T-I am no elite, my only liberal hero is Clarence Darrow. He was raised in a poor family. Went to law school, became Americas most famous lawyer.Darrrow did not forget where his beginning; he defended the working class man. As to smarts, I fiqure I'm low average. College degrees are a dime a dozen in social sciences, and a quarter in the hard scinces.

MikeM 'Once in a musium I saw fundamentalist 'block their view' of some fosils whose existance caused offense, that is not faith.'These people should not have done that BUT how different is their action from your suggestion of going to the Creation museum just for fun?

2) I have found the article now, if you'd like to read it just Google search "Evolution or Creation: Why it Matters"...The article is entitled "Evolution or Creation: What difference does it make?" If you read it, what I said will be more clear; let me know if you do read it, and what you think ok.P.S. Just curious...If you don't mind me asking; are you British, Welsh, or....? Anyway, I love you-all's accents.

Alan,1) About the Adam thing...I had read somewhere about this, I had to find where I got that idea from; I read a lot, and sometimes I get the just of something and relay it from memory; so Im sorry that it came across non-sequitur; I should have just looked it up to begin with. I also apologize for taking so long to reply.....

When Galileo challenged the view of the established church that the sun revolved around the earth, he made a statement to the effect that the Bible is true but not always our interpretation. In the same sense, the belief that God's creation took six 24 days is in the same category. The bible is true but not our interpretation.

2) **if ones faith forces them to believe the earth is only 10,000 years old, then does that prevent them from any education in the physical sciences, being it would be considered 'foolishness of man?'**Of course not, dont be silly... I, for one, would not throw the "baby" (scientific discovery) out with the "bathwater" (evolutionary time frames).My faith would override evolutionary doctrine; and I would still learn what I came to learn.

MikeM,1) **particles-to-people evolution**I thought that you of all people would be familiar with that terminology or concept. Forgive me, I just dont have time to go into it at the moment. Perhaps you could look it up.

philosophical opinions and the scientific method are very different. There is theory, and law. Gravity is a theory. Does what the Bible says and science says really differ? Science in the western tradition comes from Christianity, thee underpinings are an an assumption of natural law. Read Hobbs and Locke. The extreme secularism in science did not happen until the late 1800's. Which was called 'scientific naturalism.'

Geoff; That belief stance you offer led to what we call 'the dark ages.' This is why fundamentalist as a rule, do not go to college, and have such a rabid-anti-intellectual stance. I believe God is 'bigger than that.'Once in a musium I saw fundamentalist 'block their view' of some fosils whose existance caused offense, that is not faith.

2/2 MikeFrom your tone here I surmised that you DID NOT BELIEVE in "instant appearance of age" in creation. Sorry if wrong, again.RE: book: Carl Sagan being an atheist is really not the core issue; it is a distraction to my purpose.I mentioned it so that you could see the high level of academic scholarship here. Robert Newman is a scholar on the level of Sagan. He was Newman's academic advisor.

1/2 Mike:Sorry I was wrong on your profession, a biologist. But please notice I put Qmarks afterwards indcating uncertainity.However, you bunch PhDs together, some are even false ones. I failed to note in my first post the publisher is Inter Varsity Press. They have a good, solid academic reputation, and they would not publish something if it were not peer reviewed previously. IVP would not risk its reputation on quackery. Do you agree?

jerry6593, thanks for your answer. It appears your answer to my question, "Did God deliberately making everything appear old just to trick scientists?" is Yes. But doesnt that make God a liar? He did say he would not author confusion.

Mike you state that I offer philosophical opinion as dogma. That is what you are doing also? There is nothing that you can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt. Your theories reduce themselves to belief in the final conclusion. I use a Bible you use a Science book. You said, "50 million year old DNA has been extracted from amber." By what standard do you say this? How old is/was the Amber? Please just explain my question about the bee in amber and I'll rest.

MikeM, I have read much about problems with carbon/radiometric dating...just wondered what you know of this. By the way, If I do not respond for a time, I am not bailing, I just am not able to spend the amount of time here on a regular basis that some seem able to. My schedule only permits sporadic reading and posting

Lee, have you ever heard of apparent age. For example, Adam & Eve were created as adults and not infants. The stars and their light were also created simultaneously. The Bible is true. Just stick to it. Human reason vacillates, but God's truth remains the same-1 King 8:56The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever-Is 40:8

Elder,I just noticed that you had answered my question. Thanks. I was hoping there could be some middle ground for the "old earth" and the "young earth" people. Oh well, all that's really important anyway is a common bond in Yahshua Ha'Mashiach (The Image of I AM.)

"particle-to-people" evolution? I never heard of that before. I do ask, if ones faith forces them to believe the earth is only 10,000 years old, then does that prevent them fro any education in the physical sciences, being it would be considered 'foolishness of man?'

J ; "In the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, and every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

Elder time and space are creation in process. His time, His thoughts are not ours. "How can the Blood of one just person, Jesus, cover the sins of so many unjust people?" That is so great it transends my understanding.

If I discuss Amber in depth, bloggers will not bail, they will die of boredom. BTW 50 million year old dNA has been extraced from amber, but nothing will ever happen like in that movie.

Elder-'amino acids forming into complex proteins are impossible' yes thats true. My argument for God is ontological. Yours seems to be some type of cosmological argument. Yes, it takes more faith to think microbes to Mozart resuled from newtonian randomness than to believe in a Creator. Yours is a common argument. You offer philosophical opinion as dogma. The word, Logos is a greek concept, we see the scripture through a window tainted with greek ideas, concepts.

Last for now Mike, You said, "life was brought here or created here as the possibility of amino acids forming into complex proteins are impossible. Your final point is a philosophical opinion."I don't understand your comment. What I think is this;God created everything by His spoken word.He said, Let there be, and there was. That is it.Cond #2

Cond #2My question is always the same but to use your words they always "bail" on this one. I even asked you and will again. Why would the all powerful God have to use time and space to create what He wanted right now?If you can't answer that because of a lack of understanding then try this.How can the Blood of one just person, Jesus, cover the sins of so many unjust people?Is it in the Amino acids and complex proteins you spoke of?

Cond #3First day God created light Gen 1:3.Second day, the waters above and below Gen 1:8.Third day, plant life Gen 1:13.Every thing is doing fine without any sun yet.The forth day He created the sun, stars, moons and planets, Gen 1:19.Light curves so how could it be measured with any accuracy?When the light was created it was created the entire distance from point A to B at the same time. Yet "Science" says, Hey God you gonna hav'ta wait the light ain't got here yet.

Mike you wrote much I will try to answer.First, yes I take Psm 105:4 literally and hope you do. This is a question and it is answered in v1 of the same chapter. Because you or I may not understand what the "foundation" being spoke of here is, does not mean there isn't one.Cond #2

Cond #2What demands that the planets stay in their rotation? How does the sun burn its fiery gasses if oxygen is needed to have fire?Is there something that Mike, Elder and the Scientist don't know? Let's debate that. I'll bet my unknowing is bigger than your unknowing.Cond #3

Cond #3If amber took millions of years to produce how come there are perfectly preserved insects inside some of it?A Bee lands on some amber (tree sap) and gets stuck. He can't get out for food or just to save his life yet his body is preserved perfect without rot, decay or being eaten by something else for a million years while the sap builds up around him.... Come'on what is he made of? I have never seen a Titanium bee. There might be some but I ain't seem em.Cond #4

Cond #4To even believe that Amber is millions of years old takes more faith than I am equipped with. If it takes faith to believe it then it must be religious. Therein lies the problem, it is a Spiritual battle.If science is so accurate why can't the weather channel get their forecast right?Cond #5

Cond #5Could that amber and bee come from a great upheaval when the waters of the deep exploded in a great flood that rose for a year? The explosion occurs tree sap, mud and a lot of other things go everywhere. A bee is trapped in the tree sap and crashes with tremendous pressure and is preserved perfect in a hard piece of Amber? Get a Scientist to tell me it ain't so and let me know me what makes corn grow each cob with an even number of rows of grains around the middle and never an odd amount.

5) However, "evolutionary theory" such as "particle-to-people" evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis (supposition) or conjecture. From my understanding, this explaination for human origin is no longer used by serious scientists anyway.

4) If this is the case... "evolutionary laws" such as "adaptation" and perhaps "mutation" or what I think is now called "Micro-evolution?".... (MikeM, Mod., or anyone knowledgeable regarding this terminology, please correct me if Im wrong, as Im still learning).... would not be in conflict with a literal "6 day" creation, as long as you subtract the enormous amount of years that the evolutionary scientists are notorious for adding on.

3) Now read Genesis 1:1-2 "In the beginning God created the heaven (stars, universe) and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."This appears to indicate that the stars and earth existed prior to Gen. 1:3. Note that there's no specific time frame leaving it open to anyone's guess OR scientific discovery.

2) Read also Gen 1: 8 (second day); 13 (third day); 19 (fourth day); 23 (fifth day); and 31 (sixth day). Why would he make it a point to be so specific? Perhaps God knew that someday people would be debating this issue?

lee,**The sun was not created until the 4th day, the first days could really have been thousands or millions of years.**1) The problem I have with this idea is that Moses used the same phrase (in "ALL CAPS" below) to describe each individual day: Genesis 1:5 "And God called the light, Day. And He called the darkness, Night. AND THE EVENING AND THE MORNING WERE THE first DAY."

Watching; 1.How many Christians are led away by by evolution and its Anti-God teachers? Thats a trite rhetorical question. Is there fish in the pond? 2.Debate can only confuse new believers. As for me, I give people credit for intelligence, stifling debate is to stifle thought. Give them the infromation, they can refute it, or bail.(run away) 3.Yes I place emotion over intelligence and do so now. Then you become a victim of emotions, as then objective reality does not exist,only feelings.

John T; I present my side of the argument, one can respond or bail. I note here everything is done except for DEALING WITH THE ISSUE ITSELF. i was challenged to be 'pedantic' and put in the other glove, so I did. I continue as I do as I disagree with this literalism, as I believe it undermines both science and the Bible. "If ones faith cannot stand the test of free inquiry, its finished." As to chips/shoulders/ pentacostals, few pentacostals are even here.